| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20020815194451.GA32682@home.parts-unknown.org> From: benfell at greybeard95a.com (David Benfell) Subject: Fighting Full-Disclosure spam On Thu, 15 Aug 2002 09:14:38 -0400, Alan Rouse wrote: > I see three ways to fight the spam attack on this list: > > 1. Light Moderation. By that I mean, posts that are clearly spam > are rejected. (But no value judgements made on whether a certain > security-related posting should be allowed). Repeat spammers are banned > from the list. Etc... Given the current load, who would have time to do this? And much as I may not approve of the phrack crap, such moderation would only filter some of it. I don't think the security industry is corrupt (just sometimes misguided). If it were corrupt, however, this would be a place to discuss it, just hopefully on a somewhat more meaningful level than the (dare I call it) discourse we've seen so far. > 2. Email client filtering. When you get a spam message, add a > filter for the sender of that message. It at least makes it more > difficult for these people to get the junk through. Strongly recommended. This, I think, is a good idea. > 3. Just ignore them. Perhaps they will eventually find something > more interesting to do. If you don't have suitable client filtering, this is a second-best. > > What not to do: > > 1. Don't reply to spam. > 2. Don't unsubscribe. > 3. Don't stop sending quality posts. > > If you do any of these last three things you are contributing to the > demise of the list. > I recently received an e-mail quoting a webpage stating that this list is under attack. Among other things, it claims participants here are stupid, but does not explain why, if this is the case, they should not simply permit us to wallow in our stupidity. It also included the instruction not to forward it to the list, but to forward it only in individual replies. I suppose I am ethically compelled to comply with this request, though I frankly do not see how it helps to "beat them at their own game." -- David Benfell, LCP benfell@...ts-unknown.org --- Resume available at http://www.parts-unknown.org/resume.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 481 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20020815/2588da59/attachment.bin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists